User talk:WickerGuy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello, WickerGuy, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.

Contents

[edit] Potential conflicts of interest

Hi. Please be sure to read WP:COI, Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. I would hate for somebody to challenge your contributions to Wikipedia because of a perceived conflict of interest. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 23:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Malik. I did indeed read the Conflicts of Interest page, and elected to just do a very short summary of "Left Hand" instead of the one and a half page detailed analysis I had originally planned. This is my 'compromise' with the COI policy. Basically, I just wanted to get some Wiki entry into existence. A more detailed summary I think most definitely WOULD be a conflict of interest as my current job for Michael Lerner is to help develop the forthcoming Study Guide for the book "Left Hand of God". WickerGuy 20:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
No problem. If you're ever in doubt about whether something might be perceived as a conflict, put it on the article's Talk page and let other editors review it. Please feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Good luck with the Study Guide. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 21:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hello WickerGuy. The main problem with your edit was that you made it at Wikipedia. Unfortunately, this encyclopedia requires verifiable outside sources - see WP:CITE - for an entry like yours. If you can find a book or website by a known Kubrick scholar (I mention this because blogs that might mention this usually don't count) then you can cite it and the entry can be made. If you can't the entry falls under the wikipedia policy of "No Original Research" - see WP:OR - which basically means that you are using your knowledge and opinion (more about this later) to make your entry.

Please don't let this put you off using this knowledge of SK's reuse of actors somewhere. They're are other wikis (some of which allow original research) or blogs or message boards (like IMDb) where you can put this out there for others to learn about.

The one other thing that I want to mention is that SK reusing actors may bump into a couple of things where other SK scholars and fans may disagree with you. In the first place it isn't unique to Stanley as many directors reuse actors that they like. John Ford and Akira Kurosawa used the same actors many more times than Kubrick. I think that the biggest thing that you would bump up against is the fact that on several of the commentaries and documentaries that have been included on the recent DVD releases of Stanley's films it is mentioned several times (most notably by Malcolm McDowell) about how exhausting it was to work for Kubrick and how most actors only had one SK film in them. While there were several who did two only Philip Stone did three and his screen time is mininal in two of them.

Now please don't get me wrong. I am not trying to start an argument over this point. I am just trying to give you a few things that are pitfalls about editing here and yes it does take some of the fun out working here.

As one more note - I appreciate your knowledge of, and looking for reoccuring actors in film. I love seeing some of my favorite British actors in both films and TV. As an example I recently got to see the very first episode of The Avengers. It originally aired in 1961. Sadly, only the first 15 minutes of it exist but I was amazed to see Godfrey Quigley, Murray Melvin and the aforementioned Philip Stone in this episode. I hope that you will appreciate the fact that I recognized right away that they all appeared in Barry Lyndon over a decade later.

I freely offer my apologies if any of this has offended you as that was not my intention. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lolita

Hi, thanks for adding those sources! I am not really sure what the accessdate parameter means to other people; I generally put it in because it makes it more obvious that on such-and-such a day, somebody actually looked at the source. It also makes the reference look better if the link itself goes down or something. Which I don't think is a problem with the NYT, but other web sources more likely. EAE (Holla!) 01:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello...I'm Luigibob. Nice edits on Lollita re "Differences between the film and the book". Super film, no? Best -- Luigibob (talk) 16:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural depictions of Vincent van Gogh

FYI. Ty 04:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, as you suggested. Ty 13:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)